how about instead of burning Qurans, they sit down and draw caricatures of Mohammed and then print them in the paper.

That would satisfy your natural inclination against poking the Mulsims by not burning books, but all the creative artists would still make the most wanted list dead or alive in Islam.

With 10,000's of cultures, someone will be offended religiously or otherwise by anything someone else does or says.  Whatever you do infringes on their rights, it's inescapable. So the author is right, eliminating religion would eliminate a lot of what divides us, or was that Karl Marx?  Patreaus is right, too, it will hurt the war effort, but so what.

There shouldn't be a war effort. 

The Quran burners are right, too.  They want to send a message to Muslims that the old ways are not acceptable.  Just printing words on paper or typing blogs isn't enough.  Because Sunnis make up 85% of all Muslims, and unlike Christians are not broken up into little groups, they all follow the same rules.  The difference between a liberal, moderate, or radical Muslim is the teaching of the local Imam. As Imams change so does the character of the Muslims within the mosque.

Muslims committing terrorism are not illiterate peasants, they are usually well educated intelligent young men.  Well educated enough to understand the difference between right and wrong and the moral impact of their actions.  And yet, because of religion they do it.

Without  a central authority figure, all Muslims must take responsibility for the actions of their co-religionists, unlike Christians whom can point to their various sect leaders. That being said, what are American Muslims doing to change the horrific behavior of their Arab cousins?

I vote for cartoon day, let's show Mohammed with performing FMG on young girls, executing young women (honor killing), and marrying 12 year olds.  maybe then Muslims will get the idea that we have a problem with their customs.

 

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/09/2010 06:38:56 AM EST

If you want to eliminate what devides us you mustn't eliminate religion, you must eliminate the secular version of it: Patriotism!

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/09/2010 09:04:55 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Religion has killed far more people than nationalism ever imagined.  I would rather have national pride and no religion, than religion and exist as a slave to the state.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/09/2010 09:52:24 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Many soldiers might fight for religious reasons, but nearly all of them fight for patriotic reasons.
Did the Nazis kill for religious or nationalistic reasons?
How about the soldiers of the USSR? The Romans? The Vietcong? The American soldiers in Iraq? How many wars have there been between states and how many between religions?

I also don't understand why not being patriotic means "exist as a slave to the state". If anything the opposite might be true.

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/09/2010 10:06:40 AM EST

[ Parent ]

If there is no nationalism and only religion then we can only live in a theocracy.  Your patriotic wars only began in recent history.  Go back a few thousand years and most wars were in the name of some God or another.  The number of people killed was mind numbing.

Those killed in the name of Communism were killed simply to replace of one religion for another.  Hitler's genocides are a case in point.  Those deaths can be attributed to Eugenics gone mad and had clear religious overtones.

The number of deaths in wars recently is inconsequential compared to the genocide of the Spanish.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/09/2010 10:43:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
"If there is no nationalism and only religion then we can only live in a theocracy."

No, we could also live in automomous communes and other similar organisations. There are many ways to organise society without creating states and especially without the notion that you should be proud of the state you were born in, by chance.

"Go back a few thousand years and most wars were in the name of some God or another."

So the Romans fought their wars because of religion? That's maybe also the reason why they frequently adapted the religions of countries they conquored. The American civil war was about what religion? The reason Germans fought against Brits, French, Finns... were definitly not because of Eugenics, because they all were "Arian races". Who is the "god" in communism, if not the state? The American genocide on Indians was about religion? The Armenian genocide, too? When Athens fought against Sparta it was because of which religious differences? The wars between China and Japan? The Iraq war (I'm talking about the soldiers motivation, not what you might think Bush's motivation was)? World War I was which religion against which? I can go on if you want me too.

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/10/2010 02:42:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]

grasshopper.  Riddle yourself this...why did perfectly good Christians feel no compunction about murdering savages.  It's because they didn't have Christ in their life.

Don't tell me we are in Iraq for nationalism, that's about oil.

Roman soldiers fought for conquest, not nationalism.  Adapting religions was their way of subjugating the people.

let's see there were the crusades...or the Muslim wars to conquer Africa, Asia and Europe.

If there is anti-matter, then there is anti-god and communism is the worship of the anti-god.  those who don't agree, off with there head.  Nationalism only came to preeminence in the last 250 years.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/10/2010 07:50:50 AM EST

[ Parent ]
If there is anti-matter, then there is anti-god

That doesn't even make sense.

by OneHitKill on 09/10/2010 10:41:50 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Oh wait. It does, if you change "there" to "their."

by OneHitKill on 09/10/2010 10:42:31 AM EST

[ Parent ]

ahead.  If science can propose the concept of duality where matter and anti-matter exist.  Then the proposition that God and a non-God exists follows the exact same principle.

Socialists will jump up and down that they don't follow a religion.  Except if you try to alter their beliefs they become dogmatic.  If in the case of USSR and China, you said the opposite they killed you or re-educated you to their way of thinking.  Then socialism tries to develop a moral code based on the humanity of man.

If it walks like a duck...only in socialism god becomes the anti-god.

Something to think about.

I didn't ignore your earlier post about social communes.  That one is too far out in left field to even contemplate in the next 50 years of American society.  I pick that number, because Gen X will never support it.

Have you ever tapped into the yahoo bulletin board for the SPGB?  They have a continuing discussion about Socialism you might find interesting, and then again not.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/10/2010 11:38:29 AM EST

[ Parent ]
"Except if you try to alter their beliefs they become dogmatic."

So, the American democracy is also a religion?
When you alter their beliefs (for excample that everybody should be allowed to have a weapon) they become dogmatic. They don't argue based on reason, but based on the Constitution. That's dogmatic.

"If science can propose the concept of duality where matter and anti-matter exist.  Then the proposition that God and a non-God exists follows the exact same principle."

Maybe. Even if I would accept that after your logic energy would be anti-matter. It's not matter, therefore it must be anti-matter. Communists don't worship god, therfore they worship anti-god.

"I didn't ignore your earlier post about social communes.  That one is too far out in left field to even contemplate in the next 50 years of American society."

So you think it's possible, but just not in the close future? I thought the only alternative to patriotism was theocracy...

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/10/2010 01:05:03 PM EST

[ Parent ]

religion.  Who will be in charge, the religion.  No one is going to accept social communes at the present time and you know that.  Don't be obtuse.

Proposing something that 95% of the people will not accept is a non-discussion.  A power vacuum cannot exist or there is chaos and we go back to a warlord existence, not social communes.  People are then controlled by religion.  That is the way of civilization.  That is the way it has always been and will be unless you can remove the genes for power and greed from human existence.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/11/2010 01:18:18 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Getting rid of patriotism is not the same as getting rid of states.
States are, at least for now, necessary to organise societies. Patriotism is the notion that being born in a certain state is something to be proud of.

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/11/2010 06:57:53 AM EST

[ Parent ]

you belong to a state but you have no pride in your home?  What would be the point of the state?  Why would people give their time to the state for the benefit of others?  Wouldn't you just get a hedonistic environment where everyone simply fought for their own piece of the pie without concern for their neighbor?

There is no previous history of people not having pride in their state unilaterally  helping their neighbor.  Without an historical precedence it would be folly to anticipate a movement towards social equality without a catalyst.  - Just answering your next statement.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/11/2010 09:48:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
"There is no previous history of people not having pride in their state unilaterally"

There is also no previous history of people in a certain state not having religion. Nevertheless people here always talk how important it would be to get rid of religion. The thought that you need historical precedence to anticipate something is extremly conservative. Progressive, by definition, want to move beyond the current situation.
Patriotism is being proud of the state you were by coincidence born in. In my opinion you should only be proud of things you have achieved yourself. That's why you shouldn't be proud to be white, heterosexual, a man...
However if you had to struggle to overcome obstacles you can be proud of that.
There also have been states where patriotism was not considered something positive. I know this for sure about Germany, because I grew up there.
We cosidered patriotism as something dangerous and a crutch for people who have a problem with their own life and need something they hadn't achieved on their own to be proud of, because they are losers.
People would still consider it worth giving their time to the state for the benefit of others, because that's a good way to help other people, regardless of their nationality. The structure of the state just provides a good infrastructure to help. That's the only reason why states should be accepted. In no way does this lead to more hedonism, if anything the opposite is true, because people have to think more on their own. No authority tells you what's right or wrong, you have to find that out on your own.

P.S.: Sadly Germany is moving away from this attitude, because consumerism becomes more and more prevalent.

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/12/2010 08:18:06 AM EST

[ Parent ]

a decline in Patriotism as a natural consequence of losing the war.  Both are now returning to their natural state.  The pendulum swings back.  there is nothing wrong with that.  Patriotism can be a  force of good or evil depending on the leaders and the economic situation.

When you mix nationalism or religion with economic dislocation you usually get a toxic brew.  In the end the economy is the match that sets the nation on fire.  Germany and Japan have a long way to go before that will become an issue.

Germans have much to be proud of and they shouldn't be bashful, just not expansionist like the United States.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/12/2010 11:54:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
"Don't tell me we are in Iraq for nationalism, that's about oil."

Damn, those soldiers are all there, because they want oil? And nobody is telling them that it would be much easier to go to a gas station than to Iraq to get that?

"Roman soldiers fought for conquest, not nationalism."

About the same goes for those soldiers who want land.

You see, there is a difference between the motivation of the leaders and the followers. The leaders started every war because of power. The question is why people followed them and that reason was only in some exceptional cases religion. Not even a conflict like the one in Northern Ireland is because of religion.
The conquers of the Ottoman Empire were not about religion, otherwise there would have been a forced conversion and not the Jizya. The Empire was quite tolerant towards Christians and Jews, which means that they would have had no motivation to attack Christian states.

"communism is the worship of the anti-god"

So if communism is the worship of the anti-god, communists are the same as satanists. Beck would be proud of your logic.

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/10/2010 12:29:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
anti-god.  Anti-god is the absence of God.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/11/2010 01:12:51 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The absence of something is not anti- something.
Or is anti-matter the absence of matter?

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/11/2010 06:52:51 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/11/2010 09:42:09 AM EST

[ Parent ]
because they are people of the book and subject to taxation.  For non-believers they were completely intolerant and put to the sword.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/11/2010 01:20:01 AM EST

[ Parent ]
They didn't fight the wars to get rid of non-believers. Otherwise they wouldn't have attacked Christian countries.
Ergo, the soldiers were not motivated by religion when they attacked Christian countries, but by patriotism.

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 09/11/2010 06:55:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
what was the patriotism?  Love of the sultan?

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/11/2010 09:43:08 AM EST

[ Parent ]